TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (8) TMI 1204
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....;Mr. Mahaveer Bishnoi, AAG Mr. Rishabh Dadhich for Mr. Rajvendra Saraswat ORDER: 1. The present writ petition has been preferred seeking the following reliefs: "(i) By a suitable writ, order or direction, the impugned order dated 01.04.2026 (Annexure-8) passed by the respondent No. 4 may kindly be quashed and set aside being violative of Article 14, 19(1)(g) and 301 of the Constitution of India. (ii) By a suitable writ, order or direction, the impugned order dated 18.07.2024 (Annexure-6) passed by the respondent No. 5 may also kindly be quashed and set aside being violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 301 of the Constitution of India. (iii) By a suitable writ, order or direction, the delay in filing the app....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ess activity. In such circumstances, the approach of the authorities, particularly while dealing with appeals against cancellation orders, is expected to be fair, reasonable and not unduly technical. 8.1. At this stage, reference may be made to the judgment of this Court in, Pooja Construction Company v. Union of India & Ors., (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13263/2025 decided on 08.10.2025), wherein the Court, in identical circumstances involving dismissal of appeal solely on the ground of limitation, held as under: "7. It is a matter of record that GST registration of the petitioner has been cancelled with effect from 14.03.2024 which is virtually a civil death thereby bringing the business operations of the petitioner at ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... observes that the Appellate Authority, while dismissing the petitioner's appeal as time-barred, has proceeded solely on computation of limitation under Section 107(1) and 107(4) of the CGST/RGST Acts and has not adverted to, much less dealt with, the petitioner's explanation for delay, the nature of the ailment pleaded, or the grave consequences of non condonation in the facts of the case. The impugned appellate order is, thus, ex facie cryptic and non-speaking on these material aspects. 10. This Court finds that, although the Appellate Authority is bound by the outer limit prescribed in Section 107(4) and cannot, in exercise of its own powers, condone delay beyond the statutory cap, the constitutional jurisdiction of this Court u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... facilitate future tax compliance and collection. 13. This Court observes that both sides have raised rival contentions on the legality of the Show Cause Notice dated 18.10.2023, the alleged non-compliance with Section 169 as regards service, the validity of retrospective cancellation from 01.09.2023, and the alleged violation of Section 75(4) and principles of natural justice. These are issues which are integrally connected with the merits of the cancellation proceedings and are best examined by the statutory Appellate Authority in the first instance, upon a full and fair hearing to both parties. 14. This Court finds that it would neither be appropriate nor necessary, in the exercise of writ jurisdiction, to conclusively ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tality of circumstances, this Court is persuaded to exercise its writ jurisdiction to reopen the appellate remedy. 17. This Court observes that the ends of justice would be adequately met if the appellate order dated 18.12.2024 is set aside and the appeal filed by the petitioner is restored to the file of the Appellate Authority, with a specific direction that the appeal shall be heard and decided on merits, without being dismissed on the ground of limitation and without being influenced by the earlier order of dismissal. All contentions of both parties on the merits of the Show Cause Notice, the cancellation order and the issue of service, including reliance on case-law, shall remain open for consideration by the Appellate Authori....